In this case I am kinda happy about Israel sabotaging the 'peace process', look at what Abbas already agreed to

Quote:

These concessions offered by Abbas go beyond the known formula of two independent states on the 1967 borders (the Green Line):

- The Palestinian state would be demilitarized. (This was a key demand brought up by Netanyahu in his 2009 Bar-Ilan speech.)

- A new border would leave 80 percent (!) of the settlers under Israeli sovereignty.

- A five-year-long Israeli presence in the strategic “security zones” – mostly the Jordan Valley – that would be replaced by American forces. (This means Abbas actually offered to make the Palestinian state an enclave inside Israel for a very long period of time.)

- All Jewish neighborhoods in East Jerusalem would become part of Israel. (In other words, recognition of Israel’s annexation of certain parts of the city.)

- A symbolic return of refugees, which would depend on Israeli authorization. “Israel will not be flooded with refugees,” Abbas said during the negotiations, according to the American source.

These are the things that make a pro-Palestinian activists' life so much easier...

Quote:

Norway’s King Harald was placed in an awkward position during a reception for the outgoing Israeli President, Shimon Peres, as part of the 90-year-old’s official visit to Oslo earlier this week. Peres presented the King with two bags of Ahava skincare products, produced in an illegal settlement in the occupied West Bank.

Military training in live-fire zones in the West Bank is used as a way of reducing the number of Palestinians living nearby, and serves as an important part of the campaign against Palestinian illegal construction, an army officer revealed at a recent Knesset committee meeting.

Peter Gelb's reasons for doing this are just precious. He defends the opera itself from charges of antisemitism (he could hardly do anything else since it was he who programmed it and would be implicated by association), but claims that the production shouldn't be broadcast because of the plain trend of a "rising tide of antisemitism" in Europe, a trend made plain because the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the ever-present ADL say it exists. Of course, The Death of Klinghoffer could hardly contribute to the rising tide of antisemitism unless the work itself were antisemitic. And I'm sure that neo-Nazi thugs are constantly to be found in attendance at Metropolitan Opera broadcasts.

It's incredibly unlikely that broadcasting The Death of Klinghoffer could have done anything to fuel the spread of antisemitism, but the Israel Lobby forcing one of the biggest opera companies in the U.S. to withdraw the broadcast and making the national and international news in the process... well, let's just say that a real racist peddling conspiracy theories about how the Jews control everything, especially when it comes to the world of arts and culture, could hardly have asked for a better demonstration of his thesis. (Yes, I am looking at you, Gary Oldman.)

Meanwhile, neither the ADL nor anyone else has bothered to object to the fact that the Metropolitan Opera is also staging and giving an HD broadcast of Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg, despite the fact that the character of Beckmesser is widely regarded to be a Jewish caricature, and that its composer/librettist has a far more justified reputation for antisemitism than John Adams and Alice Goodman do. I wonder what the reason for this curious omission is. Could it be that Eva, Hans Sachs, and Walther von Stolzing aren't Palestinians?

For anyone who wants to hear the opera (audio only), here's a playlist. I highly recommend it. It's a modern masterpiece.

I'm giving a great deal of serious thought to boycotting the entirety of the '14/'15 HD broadcast season. At least I was lucky enough to catch Klinghoffer in Long Beach. That was supposed to be a co-production with the Los Angeles Opera, but they also cravenly pulled out, leaving the much smaller LBO to bear the whole financial burden of producing the work, something that could very well have sunk the company if the production hadn't been the major success it turned out to be. I'll be considering boycotting the LA Opera next season as well.

Thinking more about that animation, there's a danger that placing today's bloody doings in a bare context of past atrocities has a legitimising, or at least a distracting, effect. I suspect that Zionists would like to see their current struggle to occupy Palestine as just the latest (final?) episode in a long and inevitably brutal saga. But we should not allow the atrocities of the past to be used to justify or mitigate today's outrages, which is what Nina Paley's (or whoever's) video could be doing.

The main problem I have with it is that all those conquerers did not start deporting/cleansing the locals and importing their 'own people' to take over the land (except the Assyirians who invented deportation and the Romans who kicked out the Jews for staging a revolt against their rule).

“I think the Israeli people understand now what I always say: There cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan,” Netanyahu said, leading Horovitz to say: “That sentence, quite simply, spells the end to the notion of Netanyahu consenting to the establishment of a Palestinian state.”

'The territory west of the River Jordan' of course is all of Palestine. We can stop pretending Israel will ever allow even the tiniest Palestinian state in any form. And you can bet your butt they aren't offering them citizenship either.

The main problem I have with it is that all those conquerers did not start deporting/cleansing the locals and importing their 'own people' to take over the land (except the Assyirians who invented deportation and the Romans who kicked out the Jews for staging a revolt against their rule).

And the Babylonians. Why do people always forget the Babylonians?

ETA: And the Israelites, during the Conquest of Canaan™. They practically invented ethnic cleansing.

__________________Old Pain In The Ass says: I am on a mission from God to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable; to bring faith to the doubtful and doubt to the faithful.

And the Israelites, during the Conquest of Canaan™. They practically invented ethnic cleansing.

Yabut they did it on God's orders, so that makes it OK.

Quote:

16 Howbeit of the cities of these peoples, that the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth,
17 but thou shalt utterly destroy them: the Hittite, and the Amorite, the Canaanite, and the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee;
18 that they teach you not to do after all their abominations, which they have done unto their gods, and so ye sin against the LORD your God. [Deuteronomy 20: 16-18]

The ensuing series of mass slaughters are listed in both the Hanakh and the Old Testament. Because the Jews occupied the Promised Land by wiping out the then existing population and because I reject the notion of divine approval, I don't think the they have any superior right to it compared to that of the Palestinians.

Paley's animation does not lend itself to legitimising the violence. The killings and destruction, 80% of which hit civilians, cannot even begin to be justified on the grounds that nobody ultimately can be said to be the true owners of the land. Nor can it be used to justify the de facto apartheid, forcible evictions and what effectively amounts to establishment of concentration camps, the suicide attacks, firing of rockets and mortar, in short the entire panoply of cruelty, misery and tragedy we're looking at since the 1948 UN resolution. The Jewish state and the western media keep banging the drum about Palestinian terrorism. Yes, it exists, but the fact that the Jews had organisations itself that very effectively enforced that resolution through terrorism, seems to be swept under the carpet. We hear about Hamas and Hezbollah. For how many people does Irgun or Stern Gang ring a bell?

In summary, this is how I see the situation: Neither side has a superior right to the land, and both sides use terror to get their way. Israel's terror campaign has been run by the state for several decades now simply because Israel is a state. Neither side is interested in any form of peaceful coexistence.

Am I sitting on the fence? No. I am firmly on the Jewish side. At least it has a reasonable semblance of a democratic government, though it is a pity that not even a morsel of it drops off the table for the Palestinians. I cannot imagine a Palestinian state that is not a theocracy, replete with Shariah law and all the repression, oppression and medieval "justice" it entails. With one exception the entire Islamic Middle East is run on theocratic lines and in places overlaid with feudal ruling classes. The one exception, Turkey, has been slowly but steadily drifting toward theocracy for the past 13 years. Guess what I prefer.

If forced to lay blame on anyone for that clusterfuck, I suggest a good look at British colonial skulduggery since World War I would be helpful in finding a culprit. Here is a brief account of it:

Am I sitting on the fence? No. I am firmly on the Jewish side. At least it has a reasonable semblance of a democratic government, though it is a pity that not even a morsel of it drops off the table for the Palestinians.

There is only a 'reasonal semblence of a democratic government' in the part that is Israel inside the Green Line. The Palestinians in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza are ruled by a military dictatorship. And inside the Green Line the only reason there IS a 'reasonal semblence of a democratic government' is because there is an artificial majority of Jews. Very much like the South Africans managed to carve out a white democratic government.

Quote:

I cannot imagine a Palestinian state that is not a theocracy, replete with Shariah law and all the repression, oppression and medieval "justice" it entails. With one exception the entire Islamic Middle East is run on theocratic lines and in places overlaid with feudal ruling classes. The one exception, Turkey, has been slowly but steadily drifting toward theocracy for the past 13 years. Guess what I prefer.

Sorry to have to resort to it, but I'm afraid that is based on your own bigotry. Palestinians have always been one of the more secularized nations of the Middle-East. Hamas is 'popular' mostly because of its stance on occupation and resistance and its charities which help people who literally have nothing, not so much for its theocratic values. The first charter of the PLO the press always referred to as asking for the 'destruction of Israel', without ever mentioning that they wanted to replace it with a secular, democratic state for all the inhabitants, including the Jews (but not of course including all the Jews in the rest of the world). It was always the Zionists who wanted the whole thing exclusively for themselves and the Palestinians who were inclusive.

Iraq was a secular state and so was Syria. Generally speaking the big wave of islamic fundamentalism started around 1980 with the Iranian revolution on the Shi'a side and the Russian invasion of Afghanistan and the huge support for the (Sunni) Mujahedin by Saudi Arabia and the US. Especially in Lebanon and Syria Saudi Arabia and the US tried to stoke Sunni fundamentalism against the Shi'ites in Lebanon and the Alawites/Druzes and Christian minorities that were a large part of the officer corps in the Syrian army. In Syria that resulted in a nasty uprising by the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, which was put down even nastier. Small-scale version of what is happening there now.

So no, Islam and theocracy do not go together any more than Judaism and theocracy or Christianity and theocracy. These fires are being fueled and mostly by the Saudis (kinda like Christians fundamentalists fuel Ugandan homophobia).

And yeah, I am firmly on the Palestinian side. Mostly because they are without any doubt the ones who got the short end of the stick from the start. But mostly because human rights and international law need to be real things, not just crap that the West pulls out when they feel like bombing someone. And because we Europeans pick up the tab of a lot of what Israel is blowing up now. That's OUR harbor, we paid for it and they are destroying it AGAIN.

In the meantime, here is an old Guardian article which a friend just bumped on facebook which made me think it was current, about Stephen Hawking giving Israel a surprising kick in the crotch last year—Stephen Hawking's boycott | theguardian.com

Watser?, I agree with much of what you say. The Palestinians, for instance, have been given the short end of the stick from the start. The semblance of democracy in Israel does not apply to Palestinians at all, and that is so regardless of the Green Line. The human rights of Palestinians have been bulldozed by the Israelis on a massive scale, both literally and metaphorically. Though you did not explicitly say so, I think you'd agree with me that Israel is no less terroristic in relation to its handling of Palestinians than vice versa. I don't regard the Israeli government as the good guys any more so than you do.

Where we differ is what outcome we prefer. I wish I had your optimism about what a Palestinian nation would look like. You mentioned secularism. Pigs will fly. Nobody talks about the PLO, let alone its covenant because neither have played a part in the tragedy that is the Middle East conflict for quite some years now. Hamas rules now that it has neutralised Fatah. I predict that ISIS will take over from Hamas inside the next three years and attempt to turn the region into a theocratic, dictatorial caliphate that will make both its predecessors look positively enlightened.

Both Iraq and Syria might arguably have been governed in a secular manner - for a little while - more or less - under dictatorships and coups and counter-coups. No democracy in sight at all.

My sole preference, as I said, is the Israeli government's reasonable semblance to a democracy (and need I point out once more that I know it does not apply to Palestinians?) in light of the contrasting forms of government surrounding it, which are either theocratic, dictatorial or a mix of both.

Bit of a hot potato, that, and not popular with socialists, or even social democrats, I know, but then I never was all that enamoured of conformity. If Palestine ever comes into existence as a nation it will be a theocracy, a dictatorship or a mix of both. Covenant or not, it will not be a democracy in anything but name.

Where we differ is what outcome we prefer.
...
Hamas rules now that it has neutralised Fatah. I predict that ISIS will take over from Hamas inside the next three years and attempt to turn the region into a theocratic, dictatorial caliphate that will make both its predecessors look positively enlightened.

Hamas has not 'neutralised Fatah, Fatah has marginalised itself because of its collaboration, but Hamas isn't popular either. It can easily be argued that they are firing back useless rockets because they feel they have nothing to lose (though the population obviously has). Personally I have no idea who would win any elections right now, maybe it would be Hamas, maybe not. As for ISIS: ISIS is mostly a paper tiger. It's not even popular in the Syrian and Iraqi regions it occupies, it coasts on foreign fighters and Saudi money, plus the heavy weaponry they now captured. ISIS is not going to last.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hermit

My sole preference, as I said, is the Israeli government's reasonable semblance to a democracy (and need I point out once more that I know it does not apply to Palestinians?) in light of the contrasting forms of government surrounding it, which are either theocratic, dictatorial or a mix of both.

It's not even a very reasonable semblance if you discount how it doesn't apply to the Palestinians. It is being undermined systematically by the extreme right who keep introducing legislation that discriminates the Palestinians, but also secular Jews (there is no Israeli nationality, you can be 'Jewish', 'Arab', Druze or Circassian). Even Lebanon and Jordan make better democracies, but there's also Tunisia a bit farther away. And Israel's democracy isn't healthier than Turkey's.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hermit

Bit of a hot potato, that, and not popular with socialists, or even social democrats, I know, but then I never was all that enamoured of conformity. If Palestine ever comes into existence as a nation it will be a theocracy, a dictatorship or a mix of both. Covenant or not, it will not be a democracy in anything but name.

Yeah, you said that before, but what do you base this on? Not on anything that goes on in the Palestinian territories. Palestinians in the West Bank are certainly not theocrats, Hamas never got a majority there. As for Gaza, as I said the main reason Hamas is popular there is the perceived collaboration of Fatah/the PA. Every time they have tried to introduce stricter rules they have been met with protests. Seriously the only reason why Westerners prefer Israel over Palestine is cultural. We have been programmed to accept Israel as a Western country or even a 'Light among the Nations' and 'the only democracy in the Middle East' and to think of Palestine as a backwards Third World place where they don't share 'our values'. Even if you see it for what it is, it is still big Rock Candy Mountain in our subsconcious.

But I feel that the Arabs were not very nice in the beginning, and that was a big problem. The Jews had just come out of a terrible war where they were exterminated by the millions and persecuted all over Europe, and they were given this tiny, tiny piece of land in the desert. If the Arabs had just said, “Look, we know what you guys have been through, take this little piece of land and we’ll all be friends and help you,” and the Jews came in peace, but they didn’t. They were not nice about it, and it led to problems, and over the years, both sides have made mistakes.

Of course the rapist would blame the victim because 'I've had hard times, so I deserve it!'
It does make me wonder if a portion of his 'woes me' schtick is actually to justify taking things he 'deserves.'

An interesting insight into the workings of Wiki: If you google for "skunk water schools" you hit the Wiki page for "Skunk (weapon)" and, at least when I looked just now, google's cache for that page has this text

Quote:

A BBC reporter describes its effects as follows:-

“Imagine the worst, most foul thing you have ever smelled. An overpowering mix of rotting meat, old socks that haven’t been washed for weeks – topped off with the pungent waft of an open sewer. . .Imagine being covered in the stuff as it is liberally sprayed from a water cannon. Then imagine not being able to get rid of the stench for at least three days, no matter how often you try to scrub yourself clean.”[5]

It was sprayed in late June 2014 throughout Bethlehem's Aida refugee camp in what residents describe as an 'unprovoked and unexpected' attack, though it is regularly used according to B'tselem, against Palestinian villages where demonstrations are frequent. Among Palestinians, the liquid is known simply as "shit".[6] In rebuttal to a B'tselem report, the Israel Defense Force stated that 'Skunk' is used only when demonstrators become violent or engage in vandalism and detailed the rules of engagement in which it is used.[7] It was used in November 2014 in the Palestinian township A-Tur near the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem to douse 4 large schools, compelling 4,500 to stay home. According to local residents it is being used 'routinely and arbitrarily.'[8][9]

[footnotes [6]-[9] behind spoiler tags, because important but boring]—